Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To:  lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2010 15:22:14 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-4447650@logan.com>
Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.69; envelope-from=colyncase@earthlink.net
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net;
  b=DmF35HXX0QW7ZgM4e4pzVO3IbThkBBm52ARTi4PXQ6yMKTjIKWaSUgm70L8PZ0XL;
  h=Received:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078)
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Pitot System and AOA
From: Colyn Case <colyncase@earthlink.net>
In-Reply-To: <list-4447139@logan.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
References: <list-4447139@logan.com>


John,

funny you should bring this up just now.   I had a pitot failure just a =
couple weeks ago in a tr182.   Airplane was just coming out of the shop =
and some mud-daubers had managed to setup housekeeping.

It was a clear day and a doggy airplane so kind of a non-event.    =
....but in a IVP and on instruments it wouldn't be so fun.    If I had =
it to do over again I would definitely put in a 2nd pitot and a 2nd =
heated static.

...but as others have pointed out, now you have to think through how you =
are going to figure out which one to trust when they disagree.   I think =
I would keep the systems completely separate and hook one to my pfd and =
one to my backup instruments.    ....and be willing to lose my aoa in =
the unlikely event that the wrong system fails.

Colyn